Subject: RE: BSD-like licenses and the OSI approval process
From: "Lawrence Rosen" <lrosen@rosenlaw.com>
Date: Fri, 12 Oct 2007 15:15:40 -0700

It took me a while to find it, but Chris Travers finally said:
> My problem is that I don;t think your system actually says anything
> about the license.  For example, I see no reason why a GPL component
> couldn't be merely aggregated into such a collection.

It could be. But then I would not claim that each item in the collection is
also available under the terms of AFL 3.0, which was my whole purpose for
collecting BSD-licensed software--under hundreds of BSD variants--into my
collection in the first place. I'm trying to address the BSD license
proliferation problem by replacing them all, for practical purposes, with
AFL 3.0, a professional open source license that accomplishes everything the
BSD licensors intended. I'm doing it because each of those BSD-licensors
said I could.

For your example that includes the GPL, take a look at the collective work
that is Source Forge.

/Larry